On February 24, Mount Carmel College students faced public berating and intimidation under the guise of discipline. Around 300 students were scolded for personal choices such as relationships, smoking, drinking, and attire outside campus. Citing complaints from Vasanth Nagar residents about PG accommodations, the Principal and Director engaged in moral policing, criticizing students’ grades and issuing severe threats, including expulsion (TC) and placement bans if further complaints arose.
“ …When we got those calls from Vasanth Nagar, we have told them, if you want to complain to the police station, you can do so. We thought that it is our moral responsibility to warn you that in case, you are caught in an inappropriate behaviour or wrong time, the cops may pick you up, and then it becomes very embarrassing for your parents… And I wonder how come you have so much of time to be out at 10 o’clock, 10.30, 11… Is it that all of you in this auditorium have done extremely well in your end semester exams?… In one click of a button we will be able to bring out your CIA marks, your end semester marks, how many of you have got backlogs. Is that clear that all of you are not doing very well. So, it is your responsibility to stay indoors, study…”
– This speech was delivered by the honourable Principal of Mount Carmel College while addressing the audience—an address that will be remembered for its insightful take on student concerns.
The administration met with PG owners but failed to address students’ complaints regarding inadequate living conditions. Reports of harassment, eviction threats, unjust charges, unauthorized room inspections, and staff misconduct were disregarded, with the college stating, “It is not our problem.” However, when residents of Vasanth Nagar raised concerns about students’ personal choices, the administration responded promptly, summoning students for moral scrutiny and subjecting them to degrading remarks and threats.
The most unsettling part of the event, however, came next. After nearly 20 minutes of public scolding and humiliation, students were conveniently introduced to Mojo Hostels—a private accommodation partnered with the college.
“… and the cops this time are very firm that they would initiate actions. And once FIRs are filed… you’ll have to run around the court to get a clearance, you may have to pay fines, you have to engage lawyers. You will not get your passports renewed, you may not be able to apply for government positions. Now, all these are repercussions of having a case filed against you under the BNS… The institution, for the coming academic years, is tying up with private entities…”
Invoking the BNS to intimidate students over personal choices—such as smoking or spending time with partners—appears to be a new marketing strategy. While these actions are not offenses under BNS unless they disrupt public order or decency, fear tactics prevail over facts. Notably, the administration promoted Mojo Hostels’ amenities while remaining silent on the private entities behind the partnership, raising concerns about a potential conflict of interest. Was this spectacle designed to push students out of their PGs and into Mojo Hostels? If so, it suggests financial coercion masked as moral policing. Moreover, threats of expulsion and placement bans not only violate students’ rights but create an environment of fear rather than education.
This is not an isolated case—students across India face institutional abuse through moral policing, harassment, and coercion under the guise of discipline, contributing to rising student suicides. Rather than fostering independence and safety, many colleges, especially for women, impose control and intimidation. Mount Carmel College’s abrupt shift to a co-ed model without student consultation adds to concerns. Within a year, the administration’s actions reflect a troubling shift, with the Principal and Director focusing on policing female students. The Director’s remark about girls roaming with boyfriends in Vasanth Nagar reinforced a biased narrative, making it clear the session aimed to control women rather than address real issues.
The Student Council remains silent, serving as a rubber-stamp body handpicked by the administration rather than representing students. Its role is largely limited to acting as security during events, including unnecessary frisking. With student union elections banned in Karnataka since 1989-90, councils have become mere mouthpieces for administrations, as seen at Mount Carmel College. The absence of an independent, elected body has fostered a culture where institutional decisions go unchallenged, leaving students without a platform to defend their rights.
Despite repeated cases of student abuse there has been little to no action from lawmakers, policymakers, or law enforcement agencies. Private colleges continue to operate without accountability, leaving students with no proper channels to report grievances or seek justice. Under the pretense of education, these institutions often enforce depoliticized campuses, discouraging student activism and controlling them into silent obedience. Any attempt to voice dissent is met with severe consequences, including suspensions and, in some cases, even expulsions.
The incident at Mount Carmel College reflects a broader issue in Indian education, where business interests and fear tactics suppress student voices. Institutional accountability is essential to ensure colleges remain spaces of empowerment, not control.
